Post-Globalisierung: Konturen eines Epochenbruchs

Table of contents

Bibliographic information

Cover of Volume: Leviathan Volume 52 (2024), Issue 1
Full access

Leviathan

Volume 52 (2024), Issue 1

Authors:
Publisher
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Copyright Year
2024
ISSN-Online
1861-8588
ISSN-Print
0340-0425

Chapter information

Full access

Volume 52 (2024), Issue 1

Post-Globalisierung: Konturen eines Epochenbruchs

Authors:
ISSN-Print
0340-0425
ISSN-Online
1861-8588
Preview:

Unchallenged globalization seems to be a notion of the past. Instead of interdependence and integration, processes of deglobalization and decoupling currently capture our attention. We interpret this discursive decline of an idea previously dominant in discourse as both an effect of its routinization as well as entering a new stage of crisis and contestation. As such, on the one hand, globalization narratives are firmly established and influential in policy-making. On the other hand, these are more contested than ever and challenged by academics, pundits, and policy-makers alike. We described this concurrence as post-globalization, which emphasizes continuity and change and thus remains self-contradictory and ambiguous. This motivates us to rethink globalization not as a given but rather explore processes that might change its very nature without giving up on it altogether.

Bibliography

  1. Alles, Delphine; Badie, Bertrand 2016. „Sovereigntism in the International System: From Change to Split“, in European Review of International Studies 3, 2, S. 5–19. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  2. Ashford, Nicholas A.; Hall, Ralph P. 2011. Technology, Globalization, and Sustainable Development: Transforming the Industrial State. New Haven: Yale University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  3. Benedikter, Roland 2021. „Re-Globalisierung. Überlegungen zu einem Epochenbegriff für die Gegenwart“, in Zeitschrift für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik 14, 4, S. 455–478. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  4. Berton, Beatrice 2015. The Dark Side of the Web: ISIL’s One-Stop Shop? Paris: European Union Institute for Security Studies. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  5. Biebricher, Thomas 2021. Die Politische Theorie des Neoliberalismus. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  6. Börzel, Tanja A. 2018. „Researching the EU (Studies) into Demise?“, in Journal of European Public Policy 25, 3, S. 475–485. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  7. Brenner, Neil 1999. „Beyond State-Centrism? Space, Territoriality, and Geographical Scale in Globalization Studies“, in Theory and Society 28, 1, S. 39–78. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  8. Brown, Chris 2013. „The Poverty of Grand Theory“, in European Journal of International Relations 19, 3, S. 483–497. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  9. Cairncross, Frances 1998. The Death of Distance: How the Communications Revolution Will Change Our Lives. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  10. Castells, Manuel 1996. The Rise of the Network Society. Malden: Blackwell. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  11. Commission on Global Governance 1995. Our Global Neighbourhood. The Report of the Commission on Global Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  12. Dalby, Simon 1998. „Globalisation or Global Apartheid? Boundaries and Knowledge in Postmodern Times“, in Geopolitics 3, 1, S. 132–150. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  13. Dellmuth, Lisa Maria; Scholte, Jan Aart; Tallberg, Jonas; Verhaegen, Soetkin 2022. Citizens, Elites, and the Legitimacy of Global Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  14. Doremus, Paul N.; Keller, William W.; Pauly, Louis W.; Reich, Simon 1998. The Myth of the Global Corporation. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  15. Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, Mette 2020. „Death of International Organizations. The Organizational Ecology of Intergovernmental Organizations, 1815–2015“, in Review of International Organization 15, 2, S. 339–370. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  16. Flew, Terry 2020. „Globalization, Neo-Globalization and Post-Globalization: The Challenge of Populism and the Return of the National“, in Global Media and Communication 16, 1, S. 19–39. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  17. Franke, Ulrich; Hofferberth, Matthias 2022. „Proclaiming a Prophecy Empty of Substance? A Pragmatist Reconsideration of Global Governance“, in Journal of International Political Theory 18, 3, S. 312–335. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  18. Friedman, Thomas L. 2005. The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  19. Fukuyama, Francis 1992. The End of History and the Last Man. Los Angeles: Avon Books. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  20. Gilmour, Andrew 2014. „The Future of Human Rights: A View from the United Nations“, in Ethics & International Affairs 28, 2, S. 239–250. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  21. Goddard, Stacie E.; Nexon, Daniel H. 2016. „The Dynamics of Global Power Politics: A Framework for Analysis“, in Journal of Global Security Studies 1, 1, S. 4–18. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  22. Griffin, Penny 2017. „‚Post‘ Interventions: Postcoloniality, Poststructuralism and Questions of ‚after‘ in World Politics“, in Politics 37, 4, S. 367–370. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  23. Gygli, Savina; Haelg, Florian; Potrafke, Niklas; Sturm, Jan-Egbert 2019. „The Kof Globalisation Index – Revisited“, in The Review of International Organizations 14, 3, S. 543–574. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  24. Harmes, Adam 2012. „The Rise of Neoliberal Nationalism“, in Review of International Political Economy 19, 1, S. 59–86. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  25. Held, David 1995. Democracy and the Global Order. Cambridge: Polity Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  26. Helleiner, Eric 2021. „The Return of National Self-Sufficiency? Excavating Autarkic Thought in a De-Globalizing Era“, in International Studies Review 23, 3, S. 933–957. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  27. Hofferberth, Matthias; Lambach, Daniel 2020. „‚It’s the End of the World as We Know It‘: World Politics in a Postgovernance World“, in Global Governance 26, 4, S. 553–576. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  28. Hofferberth, Matthias; Lambach, Daniel 2022. „Becoming Global Governors. Self-Agentification, Recognition, and Delegation in World Politics“, in Global Studies Quarterly 2, 3, S. 1–12. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  29. Hofmann, Jeanette 2016. „Multi-Stakeholderism in Internet Governance: Putting a Fiction into Practice“, in Journal of Cyber Policy 1, 1, S. 29–49. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  30. Hooghe, Liesbet; Lenz, Tobias; Marks, Gary 2019. „Contested World Order: The Delegitimation of International Governance“, in The Review of International Organizations 14, 4, S. 731–743. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  31. Huntington, Samuel P. 1991. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  32. Johnson, Keith; Gramer, Robbie 2020. The Great Decoupling. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/05/14/china-us-pandemic-economy-tensions-trump-coronavirus-covid-new-cold-war-economics-the-great-decoupling/ (Zugriff vom 25.04.2023). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  33. Jungherr, Andreas; Schroeder, Ralph 2021. „Disinformation and the Structural Transformations of the Public Arena: Addressing the Actual Challenges to Democracy“, in Social Media + Society 7, 1. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:ff1df73c-4f4f-4623-ae8b-ee4c78f84954/files/r41687h77h (Zugriff vom 18.01.2024). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  34. Kornprobst, Markus; Paul, T.V. 2021. „Globalization, Deglobalization and the Liberal International Order“, in International Affairs 97, 5, S. 1305–1316. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  35. Kreutzer, Stephan; Molina Vogelsang, Manuel; Dornbusch, Friedrich; Heimer, Thomas 2022. Wie Europa seine digitale Souveränität wiederherstellen kann. Leipzig: Fraunhofer-Zentrum für Internationales Management und Wissensökonomie. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  36. Lambach, Daniel 2020. „The Normative Order of the Territorial State“, in Navigating the Frontiers of Normative Orders: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, hrsg. v. Kettemann, Matthias C., S. 44–58. Frankfurt a. M.: Campus. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  37. Lambach, Daniel 2022. „Space, Scale, and Global Politics: Towards a Critical Approach to Space in International Relations“, in Review of International Studies 48, 2, S. 282–300. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  38. Lambach, Daniel; Oppermann, Kai 2022. „Narratives of Digital Sovereignty in German Political Discourse“, in Governance 36, 3, S. 693–709. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  39. Lührmann, Anna; Lindberg, Staffan I. 2019. „A Third Wave of Autocratization Is Here: What Is New About It?“, in Democratization 26, 7, S. 1095–113. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  40. Mead, Walter Russell 2014. „The Return of Geopolitics: The Revenge of the Revisionist Powers“, in Foreign Affairs 93, 3, S. 69–79. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  41. Mearsheimer, John J. 2019. „Bound to Fail. The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order“, in International Security 43, 4, S. 7–50. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  42. Messner, Dirk; Nuscheler, Franz 1996. Global Governance: Herausforderungen an die deutsche Politik an der Schwelle zum 21. Jahrhundert. Policy Paper. Bonn: Stiftung Entwicklung und Frieden. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  43. Morozov, Evgeny 2013. To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism. New York: Allen Lane. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  44. Müller, Jan-Werner 2017. What Is Populism? London: Penguin. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  45. Nolan, Brian; Richiardi, Matteo G.; Valenzuela, Luis 2019. „The Drivers of Income Inequality in Rich Countries“, in Journal of Economic Surveys 33, 4, S. 1285–1324. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  46. Norris, Pippa; Inglehart, Ronald 2019. Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  47. Ohmae, Kenichi 1994. The Borderless World. Power and Strategy in the Global Marketplace. London: Harper Collins Publishers. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  48. Ohmae, Kenichi 1995. The End of the Nation State: The Rise of Regional Economies. New York: Free Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  49. Panke, Diana 2020. „Regional Cooperation through the Lenses of States: Why Do States Nurture Regional Integration?“, in The Review of International Organizations 15, 2, S. 475–504. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  50. Paris, Roland 2020. „The Right to Dominate: How Old Ideas About Sovereignty Pose New Challenges for World Order“, in International Organization 74, 3, S. 453–489. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  51. Paul, T. V. 2021. „Globalization, Deglobalization and Reglobalization: Adapting Liberal International Order“, in International Affairs 97, 5, S. 1599–1620. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  52. Pickel, Andreas 2003. „Explaining, and Explaining with, Economic Nationalism“, in Nations and Nationalism 9, 1, S. 105–127. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  53. Poell, Thomas; Nieborg, David; van Dijck, José 2019. „Platformisation“, in Internet Policy Review 8, 4. http://hdl.handle.net/10419/214087 (Zugriff vom 18.01.2024). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  54. Rodiles, Alejandro 2021. „The Global South and the Law and Governance of Global Security: Towards a Scholarship on the Global Ecology of Insecurities“, in The Oxford Handbook of the International Law of Global Security, hrsg. v. Geiß, Robin; Melzer, Nils, Part IV, 48. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  55. Rosecrance, Richard 2001. Das Globale Dorf: New Economy und das Ende des Nationalstaats. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  56. Rosenau, James N. 2000. „The Governance of Fragmegration: Neither a World Republic nor a Global Interstate System“, in Studia Diplomatica 53, 5, S. 15–39. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  57. Rosenau, James N.; Czempiel, Ernst-Otto 1992. Governance without Government. Order and Change in World Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  58. Rosenberg, Justin 2005. „Globalization Theory: A Post Mortem“, in International Politics 42, 1, S. 2–74. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  59. Sassen, Saskia 2007. A Sociology of Globalization. New York: W. W. Norton. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  60. Saxer, Marc 2022. Neues altes Großmächtekonzert. www.ipg-journal.de/rubriken/aussen-und-sicherheitspolitik/artikel/weltordnung-von-morgen-6071/ (Zugriff vom 25.04.2023). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  61. Schäfer, Armin; Zürn, Michael 2021. Die demokratische Regression: Die politischen Ursachen des autoritären Populismus. Berlin: Suhrkamp. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  62. Schirm, Stefan A.; Busch, Andreas; Lütz, Susanne; Walter, Stefanie; Zimmermann, Hubert 2022. De-Globalisierung. Forschungsstand und Perspektiven. Baden-Baden: Nomos. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  63. Skierka, Isabel 2020. Die 5G-Debatte: Ein Test für die „Digitale Souveränität“ Europas. Analysen & Argumente. Berlin: Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  64. Stokes, Doug 2018. „Trump, American Hegemony and the Future of the Liberal International Order“, in International Affairs 94, 1, S. 133–150. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  65. Strange, Susan 1996. The Retreat of the State. The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  66. Walter, Stefanie 2021 a. „The Backlash Against Globalization“, in Annual Review of Political Science 24, 1. www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041719-102405 (Zugriff vom 15.01.2024). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  67. Walter, Stefanie 2021 b. „Brexit Domino? The Political Contagion Effects of Voter-Endorsed Withdrawals from International Institutions“, in Comparative Political Studies 54, 13, S. 2382–2415. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  68. Weiss, Moritz; Biermann, Felix 2023. „Cyberspace and the Protection of Critical National Infrastructure“, in Journal of Economic Policy Reform 26, 3, S. 250–267. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  69. Whitehead, Laurence 2009. „Losing ‚the Force‘? The ‚Dark Side‘ of Democratization after Iraq“, in Democratization 16, 2, S. 215–242. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  70. Witt, Michael A.; Li, Peter Ping; Välikangas, Liisa; Lewin, Arie Y. 2021. „De-Globalization and Decoupling: Game Changing Consequences?“, in Management and Organization Review 17, 1, S. 6–15. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93
  71. Zürn, Michael; de Wilde, Pieter 2016. „Debating Globalization: Cosmopolitanism and Communitarianism as Political Ideologies“, in Journal of Political Ideologies 21, 3, S. 280–301. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/0340-0425-2024-1-93

Citation

Download RIS Download BibTex

Downloads

Download chapter (PDF)

Notice

This work is protected by copyright and may only be used in accordance with the provisions of the Terms of Use and License Agreement. Any use of the work beyond this is expressly prohibited and will be prosecuted.

Share via email

Media